Re: newbie about winAPI
From: wolfgang kern (nowhere_at_nevernet.at)
Date: 03/26/04
- Next message: Bx.C: "Re: 16-bit vs. 32-bit code segment check -- wanting comments good and bad..."
- Previous message: wolfgang kern: "Re: newbie about winAPI"
- In reply to: Robert Wessel: "Re: newbie about winAPI"
- Next in thread: hutch--: "Re: newbie about winAPI"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 12:04:24 +0000 (UTC)
Hi Robert,
| > I'd rather learn Japanese before I give C+- a try :)
| > [after disassembling the awful detouring code produced with].
| Code quality is a silly reason to not learn a language. First, it
| varies greatly by compiler, and second, you're talking about writing a
| management application for which performance ought to be a complete
| non-issue.
Ok, I'm already able to interpret C-examples and I know about
the calling conventions.
Right, the actual application isn't time-critical at all,
but I think to reuse my stuff for future projects also,
and my tasks are usual external events capture in true real-time.
| So who cares if the generated code is not as fast or pretty
| as it might be?
At least me ;) [on my banner: "fast/short/transparent"].
*
How fast and short could windoze be
if everyone would think like me.
*
| In any event, I'd rather learn Japanese than try to learn Windows GUI
| programming using assembler, if for no other reason than *none* of the
| documentation or support exists with assembler in mind - in short
| you're pretty much going to have to learn C if you want to do this
| anyway. I've written great swaths of assembler, including x86, and
| I've never found a reason to write any meaningful sized chunk of GUI
| user interface code in assembler (not that there would be any
| difficulty doing it at this point, just that there's no point).
If you look at all these 'ASM for windoze'-tools, they use the same
HLL syntax for API-calls and a lot of HLL-styled macros for block-
statements, not to forget the 'proc' directives.
So I see the difference just in the used syntax and the compilers.
And ASM compilers produce better performing code by far.
| > But right, my last way out will be either VB or G,
| > even I'm known as the 'hex-freak' (author of KESYS)
| > and I know all 486 instructions and already a few SSE/3dnow
| > in their hexadecimal form by heart, if I cannot find the needed
| > functions/info in time, I'm forced to chose this way.
| You will not find the "functions/info" in time. Doing what you
| propose involves a learning curve of at least several months.
I think the whole job including a 32KB HC11 ROM,
will be done within six weeks,
there are not many API-functions to include.
I got now:
the PE-header file description
the win32.hlp
many hints from this thread [THANKS!]
What I still need:
a few answers to soon coming questions ;)
a large depot of cigarettes, a full fridge and concentration ...
** Tobacc, Feder und Papier
sind bereit und warten hier,
warte nun auf der Muse Kuss,
der bringt die Arbeit schnell zum Schluss.
** (frei nach Wilhelm Busch)
__
wolfgang
- Next message: Bx.C: "Re: 16-bit vs. 32-bit code segment check -- wanting comments good and bad..."
- Previous message: wolfgang kern: "Re: newbie about winAPI"
- In reply to: Robert Wessel: "Re: newbie about winAPI"
- Next in thread: hutch--: "Re: newbie about winAPI"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
